BACKGROUND: Most individuals with lung cancer have symptoms for several months before presenting to their GP. Earlier consulting may improve survival. AIM: To evaluate whether a theory-based primary care intervention increased timely consulting of individuals with symptoms of lung cancer. DESIGN AND SETTING: Open randomised controlled trial comparing intervention with usual care in two general practices in north-east Scotland. METHOD:Smokers and ex-smokers aged ≥55 years were randomised to receive a behavioural intervention or usual care. The intervention comprised a single nurse consultation at participants' general practice and a self-help manual. The main outcomes were consultations within target times for individuals with new chest symptoms (≤3 days haemoptysis, ≤3 weeks other symptoms) in the year after the intervention commenced, and intentions about consulting with chest symptoms at 1 and 6 months. RESULTS:Two hundred and twelve participants were randomised and 206 completed the trial. The consultation rate for new chest symptoms in the intervention group was 1.19 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.92 to 1.53; P = 0.18) times higher than in the usual-care group and the proportion of consultations within the target time was 1.11 (95% CI = 0.41 to 3.03; P = 0.83) times higher. One month after the intervention commenced, the intervention group reported intending to consult with chest symptoms 31 days (95% CI = 7 to 54; P = 0.012) earlier than the usual care group, and at 6 months this was 25 days (95% CI = 1.5 to 48; P = 0.037) earlier. CONCLUSION:Behavioural intervention in primary care shortened the time individuals at high risk of lung disease intended to take before consulting with new chest symptoms (the secondary outcome of the study), but increases in consultation rates and the proportions of consultations within target times were not statistically significant.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Most individuals with lung cancer have symptoms for several months before presenting to their GP. Earlier consulting may improve survival. AIM: To evaluate whether a theory-based primary care intervention increased timely consulting of individuals with symptoms of lung cancer. DESIGN AND SETTING: Open randomised controlled trial comparing intervention with usual care in two general practices in north-east Scotland. METHOD: Smokers and ex-smokers aged ≥55 years were randomised to receive a behavioural intervention or usual care. The intervention comprised a single nurse consultation at participants' general practice and a self-help manual. The main outcomes were consultations within target times for individuals with new chest symptoms (≤3 days haemoptysis, ≤3 weeks other symptoms) in the year after the intervention commenced, and intentions about consulting with chest symptoms at 1 and 6 months. RESULTS: Two hundred and twelve participants were randomised and 206 completed the trial. The consultation rate for new chest symptoms in the intervention group was 1.19 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.92 to 1.53; P = 0.18) times higher than in the usual-care group and the proportion of consultations within the target time was 1.11 (95% CI = 0.41 to 3.03; P = 0.83) times higher. One month after the intervention commenced, the intervention group reported intending to consult with chest symptoms 31 days (95% CI = 7 to 54; P = 0.012) earlier than the usual care group, and at 6 months this was 25 days (95% CI = 1.5 to 48; P = 0.037) earlier. CONCLUSION: Behavioural intervention in primary care shortened the time individuals at high risk of lung disease intended to take before consulting with new chest symptoms (the secondary outcome of the study), but increases in consultation rates and the proportions of consultations within target times were not statistically significant.
Authors: Denise R Aberle; Amanda M Adams; Christine D Berg; William C Black; Jonathan D Clapp; Richard M Fagerstrom; Ilana F Gareen; Constantine Gatsonis; Pamela M Marcus; JoRean D Sicks Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-06-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sarah M Smith; Peter Murchie; Graham Devereux; Marie Johnston; Amanda J Lee; Una Macleod; Marianne C Nicolson; Rachael Powell; Lewis D Ritchie; Sally Wyke; Neil C Campbell Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Susan Michie; Charles Abraham; Martin P Eccles; Jill J Francis; Wendy Hardeman; Marie Johnston Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2011-02-07 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Sonya R Murray; Peter Murchie; Neil Campbell; Fiona M Walter; Danielle Mazza; Emily Habgood; Yvonne Kutzer; Andrew Martin; Stephen Goodall; David J Barnes; Jon D Emery Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-05-18 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Barbara Farquharson; Stephan Dombrowski; Alex Pollock; Marie Johnston; Shaun Treweek; Brian Williams; Karen Smith; Nadine Dougall; Claire Jones; Stuart Pringle Journal: Open Heart Date: 2014-08-12
Authors: F M Walter; G Rubin; C Bankhead; H C Morris; N Hall; K Mills; C Dobson; R C Rintoul; W Hamilton; J Emery Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2015-03-31 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Richard Wagland; Lucy Brindle; Sean Ewings; Elizabeth James; Mike Moore; Carol Rivas; Ana Ibanez Esqueda; Jessica Corner Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-11-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Katie Mills; Jon Emery; Rebecca Lantaff; Michael Radford; Merel Pannebakker; Per Hall; Nigel Burrows; Kate Williams; Catherine L Saunders; Peter Murchie; Fiona M Walter Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-11-28 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Yvonne Cunningham; Sally Wyke; Kevin G Blyth; Douglas Rigg; Sara Macdonald; Una Macleod; Stephen Harrow; Kathryn A Robb; Katriina L Whitaker Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2019-02-12 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Barbara Farquharson; Purva Abhyankar; Karen Smith; Stephan U Dombrowski; Shaun Treweek; Nadine Dougall; Brian Williams; Marie Johnston Journal: Open Heart Date: 2019-02-27
Authors: Louise Mahncke Guldbrandt; Morten Fenger-Grøn; Torben Riis Rasmussen; Finn Rasmussen; Peter Meldgaard; Peter Vedsted Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2015-11-25 Impact factor: 4.430